Existing visual modeling paradigms do not adequately cover the visual modeling of security protocols: sequences of interactions between principals in a security system. A visual formalism for security protocol modeling should not only be well-defined but also satisfy certain pragmatic criteria: support for compositional, comprehensive, laconic, and lucid models. Candidate techniques from the OMG's Model Driven Architecture, based largely on UML 2.0, lack a formal syntax and semantics. Well-defined visual formalisms outside of UML have shortcomings with respect to one or more of the pragmatic criteria. We present the GSPML visual formalism as a solution that satisfies all of the pragmatic criteria. We show that GSPML is well-defined with structural operational semantics and a hypergraph grammar syntax.
%0 Journal Article
%1 mcdermott_08_formalism
%A Mcdermott, J.
%A Allwein, G.
%D 2008
%J Journal of Visual Languages & Computing
%K 2008 statecharts petrinets lts csp
%N 2
%P 153--181
%R 10.1016/j.jvlc.2006.10.006
%T A formalism for visual security protocol modeling
%U http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvlc.2006.10.006
%V 19
%X Existing visual modeling paradigms do not adequately cover the visual modeling of security protocols: sequences of interactions between principals in a security system. A visual formalism for security protocol modeling should not only be well-defined but also satisfy certain pragmatic criteria: support for compositional, comprehensive, laconic, and lucid models. Candidate techniques from the OMG's Model Driven Architecture, based largely on UML 2.0, lack a formal syntax and semantics. Well-defined visual formalisms outside of UML have shortcomings with respect to one or more of the pragmatic criteria. We present the GSPML visual formalism as a solution that satisfies all of the pragmatic criteria. We show that GSPML is well-defined with structural operational semantics and a hypergraph grammar syntax.
@article{mcdermott_08_formalism,
abstract = {Existing visual modeling paradigms do not adequately cover the visual modeling of security protocols: sequences of interactions between principals in a security system. A visual formalism for security protocol modeling should not only be well-defined but also satisfy certain pragmatic criteria: support for compositional, comprehensive, laconic, and lucid models. Candidate techniques from the OMG's Model Driven Architecture, based largely on UML 2.0, lack a formal syntax and semantics. Well-defined visual formalisms outside of UML have shortcomings with respect to one or more of the pragmatic criteria. We present the GSPML visual formalism as a solution that satisfies all of the pragmatic criteria. We show that GSPML is well-defined with structural operational semantics and a hypergraph grammar syntax.},
added-at = {2009-02-11T20:42:25.000+0100},
author = {Mcdermott, J. and Allwein, G.},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/210bc6efb72ae155c964f6700a5ccc2df/leonardo},
citeulike-article-id = {2014073},
doi = {10.1016/j.jvlc.2006.10.006},
interhash = {d6ba0625f9ec88b77696a52779d2d276},
intrahash = {10bc6efb72ae155c964f6700a5ccc2df},
journal = {Journal of Visual Languages \& Computing},
keywords = {2008 statecharts petrinets lts csp},
month = {April},
number = 2,
pages = {153--181},
posted-at = {2008-03-31 14:15:55},
priority = {3},
timestamp = {2009-02-11T20:42:25.000+0100},
title = {A formalism for visual security protocol modeling},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvlc.2006.10.006},
volume = 19,
year = 2008
}